ideas Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 is there any video quality improvement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 Why don't you look at the changelog, or encode a short video with the previous version, then do the same with 6.6 and compare the two side by side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weEvil Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 Used 6.5Its okay in my opinion. Xvid still kicks its a** though. Especially when encoding with AutoGK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tain Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 Why don't you look at the changelog, or encode a short video with the previous version, then do the same with 6.6 and compare the two side by side.Here's a helpful link: http://www.divx.com/divx/windows/codec/Nutshell:What’s new in the latest DivX CodecUp to 12% faster decoding for smoother playbackOver 10% faster encoding in “Insane” modeUp to 7% better compression for HD capture in "Fastest" modeExperimental support for SSE4 on new Intel Penryn CPUs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ideas Posted May 7, 2007 Author Share Posted May 7, 2007 (edited) so you are saying that DivX in comparison with Xvid, Xvid is better? Edited May 7, 2007 by ideas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weEvil Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 so you are saying in comparison with Xvid, Xvid is better?Yes. Much better image quality wise. Cherk out doom9 forum for more info.Xvid also has dual core support if you have that kind of processor. Not sure about the ATi Avivo GPU encoding. I read that DivX has this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted May 8, 2007 Share Posted May 8, 2007 so you are saying that DivX in comparison with Xvid, Xvid is better?I knew this 4 years ago when I was encoding raw AVI files from my MiniDV camcorder with DivX and XviD. XviD was smaller in filesize at the same bitrate but the colors were more crisp, less blocky, noisy, etc. DivX was blocky, merged a lot of colors and made it look like crap.Nowadays, I don't know as I haven't done that in a few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ytrewq Posted May 8, 2007 Share Posted May 8, 2007 so you are saying that DivX in comparison with Xvid, Xvid is better?Much better indeed. And if you don't need playback on those "divx players" (i.e. as long as it works on a PC), then try x264. It's far better than both quality wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 ...then try x264. It's far better than both quality wise. DivX < XviD < x264 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weEvil Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 ...then try x264. It's far better than both quality wise. DivX < XviD < x264Ditto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ideas Posted May 12, 2007 Author Share Posted May 12, 2007 how do u convert to x264 or what program is best used? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weEvil Posted May 13, 2007 Share Posted May 13, 2007 how do u convert to x264 or what program is best used?x264. That's the encoder. Its CLI.Look at MeGUI at a starting point.If you want to know more head on over to the Doom9 forum. This is what they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now